Skip to main content

View Diary: Fallacies in Tea Party Rhetoric 101: Red Herrings and Gun Control (12 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No, I'm not (0+ / 0-)

    Not if the kinds you have are grandfathered in. If you are still allowed to have the guns after the law is passed, no one is taking them away.

    Discourse is better served if we can stick to the rules of logic.

    by backell on Thu Jan 31, 2013 at 10:23:51 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  then what's the point? (0+ / 0-)
      •  You need to ask? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        efrenzy

        If you're honestly asking, the stated purpose is to "dry up the existing supply" of assault rifles. Additionally, it will make it harder for criminals to acquire them.

        Now you can argue that they'll still be able to do it. But it will be harder, and more expensive, for them to do it. As I said in the beginning,

        Simply put the goal is to make it as hard as possible for criminals and those with certain mental illnesses to obtain guns while infringing as little as possible on the rights of responsible citizens to obtain them.

        That's the point.

        Discourse is better served if we can stick to the rules of logic.

        by backell on Thu Jan 31, 2013 at 12:14:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site